Christmas Hamper Savings Schemes

Lord Truscott: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs (Ian McCartney) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I promised to keep this House informed of the Government's progress to put in place measures to avoid a repetition of the devastating impact on Farepak customers caused by the demise of the company last autumn.
	Upon the collapse of Farepak, the Government acted quickly to set up the Farepak Response Fund, which secured £8 million. Thereafter, the Government have sought to work with the industry in order to provide added protection for consumers. While the urgency of the situation which existed ahead of Christmas may have passed, I have remained as committed to this issue as I was when it first arose. Today, I am pleased to announce that discussions with the industry have led to an agreement between industry and government which I am confident will lead to far greater consumer protection in the future.
	Since the collapse of Farepak, the remaining hamper companies have been taking payments towards Christmas 2007. My immediate priority therefore has been to concentrate on securing early action to ensure that these payments are protected as far as possible to avoid a repetition of the situation where some of the poorest families in Britain, who had budgeted for Christmas, paid the price for the collapse of Farepak.
	Since last autumn, the Government have been in discussions with the existing companies in this sector to develop an industry-led scheme to provide better safeguards for pre-payments through independently controlled, ring-fenced accounts, similar to the scheme that protects National Lottery prize money in the event of Camelot becoming insolvent. The purpose of these ring-fencing arrangements is to ensure customers' money could only be credited to the customers and agents should the company go bust, thereby avoiding another situation like Farepak. The key points of the proposal are:
	the customers' money would be placed in a separate account and held on behalf of the customers;control of this account would rest with independent trustees and not with the company; the money would be released to the company by the trustees only to satisfy the customers' orders, and not for other business activities or expenses of the business; andthe arrangements would be formally defined as a trust deed and would be subject to trust law.
	I am pleased to report that the industry has agreed to safeguard pre-payments through trust arrangements on these lines, thereby protecting the interests of consumers within the hamper industry. The companies are now working to introduce these accounts over the coming weeks. We think that effective safeguards of this type will provide the reassurance consumers are looking for in this industry. We therefore strongly welcome this move.
	To increase consumer confidence further, we are also working with the industry to ensure these arrangements are monitored by a new, strengthened trade association. We will be looking for the trade association to put in place effective procedures through a reinforced code of practice to monitor the companies and ensure these accounts are established and operated correctly.
	The trade association will have a strong independent element—independent directors will have responsibility for ensuring compliance with the code of practice. In particular, the code will be monitored by an independent Director of Compliance, free from association with any hamper company. Consumer concerns and consumer rights will be monitored by an independent Director of Consumer Affairs. We expect the companies to make the appointments in the next few weeks.
	We will continue to work with the industry to ensure these measures are put in place as quickly as possible. I believe this move is an important step and welcome the commitment of the industry to seek to protect its customers.
	In the longer term, the advice received from the Office of Fair Trading and the Financial Services Authority on a range of options to protect consumer interests in this industry will be considered alongside the findings of the two investigations into Farepak by the administrators and the DTI's Companies Investigation Branch. I hope to come back to the House once we have had a chance to consider all these issues.
	With respect to the ongoing investigation into the administration of Farepak, the administrators have a statutory requirement to report to the Secretary of State within six months of their appointment. Their report is expected no later than 13 April 2007. The Insolvency Service will then consider the administrators' report and consider whether there are grounds for requiring further investigation—for example, with a view to bringing proceedings to disqualify the directors of Farepak Foods & Gifts Ltd from acting as directors to any other company.
	The DTI's Companies Investigation Branch is continuing its wider confidential investigation into the circumstances surrounding the failure of Farepak. I do, of course, recognise the understandable desire for a speedy inquiry, but the investigation needs to be both thorough and fair, and it would not be appropriate to give an estimate for its conclusion. The victims of the collapse of Farepak have the right to expect that a comprehensive investigation has taken place.
	I will provide further details to honourable Members in due course.

Deepcut Review: One Year On

Lord Drayson: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	One year on from the publication of the Deepcut Review, I am reporting on the progress that has been made in the provision of care for our young recruits and trainees.
	We remain indebted to the work undertaken by Nicholas Blake QC for his independent, objective and comprehensive analysis of all relevant matters bearing on the four deaths at Deepcut. This added impetus to the extensive programme of work that was already under way to deliver improvements in the provision of care of our young recruits and trainees. Many of the actions arising from the review are either complete or near completion and we have made significant progress. In their Better Training report, published on 6 March and which I welcomed in my Written Statement on 6 March 2007 (Official Report, cols. 123-124WS), the Adult Learning Inspectorate (ALI) comments on the changes we have made to improve the training environment and our progress in detail.
	The Deepcut Review made specific recommendations with regard to our care of recruits and trainees under 18 years of age and the environment in which they are trained. We have implemented the supervisory care directive across the training organisations to reduce the risks to trainees. Our policy regarding the management, care and welfare of service personnel under the age of 18 has been revised and reissued. Arrangements are in place to ensure that our under 18s are properly identified, monitored and supported throughout their training, and when necessary during their free time too. We have also improved our procedures to prevent under 18s inadvertently deploying to hostile theatres of operations.
	The Deepcut review required us to look at ways to reduce the number of soldiers joining their units while under the age of 18. From September 2008, all the Army's junior entry phase 1 training will be conducted at either the Army Foundation College Harrogate over 42 weeks, or over a period of 20 weeks at the Army Training Regiment Winchester, from where trainees go on to complete longer phase 2 training courses.
	We continue to look at ways of ensuring the physical and mental suitability of recruits to the Armed Forces and all three services now have pre-joining fitness tests that must be passed before entry. The Army obtains medical information from GPs to corroborate a candidate's response in the British Army health questionnaire and to answer further questions, thus reducing reliance on self-declaration. A copy of the trainee's NHS records is also obtained at the start of phase 1 training to improve primary healthcare, and, if necessary, to substantiate the previous information on physical or psychological vulnerabilities. This practice is to be evaluated later in the year with a view to application across the three services.
	The Deepcut review recommended that the Army should encourage maximum involvement in the selection process by the parent, or other responsible adult, of the applicant under 18. We have made great efforts to keep families and partners informed as recruits pass through training. We engage with families if a young recruit has a problem but in general our contact with families goes far beyond keeping them informed of problems; as they receive letters and phone calls about progress and information about forthcoming events. The ALI has acknowledged that our approach to recruits' families has improved significantly (Better Training report, page 17).
	The Deepcut review recommended that recruits who joined the Army as minors and who have reached a settled decision that they are unhappy with pursuing a military career before they reach the end of their phase 2 training, but after their 18th birthday, should be able to discharge as of right. We have no plans to change our policy that allows all new recruits who have completed 28 days' service, regardless of their age, to discharge as of right (DAOR) within the first six months of service. However, those under the age of 18 years three months who have passed their statutory period for DAOR and who are clearly unhappy in their service may be considered for discharge from the Armed Forces provided that their unhappiness has been registered with their commanding officer before reaching the age of 18.
	To address recommendations made on the training and selection of instructors, we have introduced the defence train the trainer course, which was mandated for all new instructors from April 2006. On 2 April 2007, a purpose-built Army Recruiting and Training Division Staff Leadership School will open at Pirbright. The Armed Forces have tightened up their procedures for checking the personal records of service personnel before employing them as instructors, to ensure that only suitable personnel of the right quality are posted to training establishments. While current legislation does not allow for Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks to be carried out on personnel working with recruits and trainees under the age of 18 because they are in full-time employment, we are working as a matter of urgency with the DfES and Home Office on changes to legislation that will allow greater flexibility in carrying out CRB checks on employees in the future. These changes are likely to come into effect this summer.
	We have introduced a new policy on remedial training to address the recommendations in the Deepcut review on the use of informal punishments. The new policy defines what is legitimate in order to assist trainees to achieve required standards and to ensure that both instructors and trainees distinguish this from bullying or harassment, which is always unacceptable. It also reinforces the difference between training and punishment. Punishment may be awarded only as a result of a formal disciplinary process. Unofficial punishments are always unacceptable. The defence instructor handbook includes the behavioural standard expected of an instructor and it makes it clear that any unacceptable behaviour will not be tolerated. Any allegations of wrong-doing are thoroughly investigated and where proven, appropriate action is taken against the perpetrators that may, ultimately, result in dismissal from the service.
	We have made real progress in managing the risk of self-harm and suicide. Training is being implemented, at all levels, on the identification and management of both operational and workplace stress. The supervisory care directive issued in March 2006 sets out the responsibilities of commanding officers in respect of managing risks to recruits, including the maintenance of an "at risk" register. The term "at risk" is interpreted widely and intelligently to include any recruits experiencing problems that affect their performance during training and which may put them at risk of failing their course. This approach has transformed the way in which support is targeted and the ALI cited this as our single most important development (Better Training report, page 17).
	We said in our response to the Deepcut review that we intended to extend and deepen inspection arrangements across the military justice system using the opportunity afforded by the creation of a combined inspectorate for the criminal justice system. Although a combined inspectorate will now not be created under the Police and Justice Act, we intend to continue to progress our plans with the five separate justice inspectorates, and are working closely with other government departments to achieve this.
	As a result of the Deepcut Review, we have produced a simple leaflet on what to do on encountering any form of bullying, who to turn to for help, sources of advice, definitions of the terms bullying and harassment and an overview of how complaints are made, responded to, investigated and dealt with. The Army has completed its trial of a system called "Bullytext" where trainees who may not wish to report incidents to the chain of command can text messages to an authorised officer. The trial was undertaken in three large training establishments, but received limited use by trainees so it was not possible to undertake a detailed assessment of its merit. However, feedback from trainees has indicated that the existence of such a scheme acts as a "reassurance mechanism" that is considered beneficial to them. Other more localised schemes using a text messaging service are therefore now being explored to complement the well-used confidential support line.
	We have revised and reissued our procedures for making and dealing with complaints of bullying and harassment. The revised procedures apply to both service and civilian personnel and set out how to make a complaint, how to respond if the subject of a complaint, and how complaints are investigated and decided upon. We have provided clearer guidance on how the complaints procedures work, with more information on how to get help and advice, and on how complaints are logged and recorded. Further improvements will be made to the complaints process under the Armed Forces Act 2006, including the introduction of service complaint panels, which include an external, independent member for the consideration of complaints which make allegations of harassment and bullying. We will appoint a service complaints commissioner who will be able to receive complaints directly from service personnel, or from a third party, and refer them to the chain of command for action. While many complaints can be resolved satisfactorily by the chain of command at the lowest possible level, the service complaints commissioner will offer service personnel and others an alternative means of raising a grievance if they do not feel comfortable, for whatever reason, in reporting it to the relevant commanding officer. These changes are planned to come into effect in 2008, ahead of full implementation of Armed Forces Act 2006. The recruitment process for the position of service complaints commissioner will begin shortly.
	The Deepcut review made recommendations about armed guarding and unsupervised access to weapons. The policy for routine armed guarding at training establishments has been updated and we are well into a programme of transferring routine armed guarding at all phase 2 establishments to the Military Provost Guard Service rather than trainees. Phase 2 trainees may be tasked to carry out armed guarding but only under strict guidelines which ensure that they are appropriately qualified, supervised and receive proper rest periods following their armed guarding duties. No trainee awaiting discharge from the services is used and no phase 1 trainees carry out armed guarding duties in any establishment.
	There are tighter and better enforced controls over access to firearms and the risks associated with the use of firearms in our training establishments are managed more carefully. While phase l trainees are no longer required to carry out armed guarding duties, we continue to prepare them adequately for the duties that will be expected of them once they join their units.
	The Deepcut review made recommendations regarding our support to bereaved families. We recognise the families' needs and we offer them considerable support. But each family's needs are different and we acknowledge that we do not always meet their expectations. We go to great lengths to pass all relevant information to the families; this includes redacted copies of the board of inquiry. Families are routinely offered briefings on the board of inquiry to help them understand its content and conclusions. Equally, our support through the services of a visiting officer remains available for as long as the family needs it. We continue working with the Department for Constitutional Affairs to improve support to families based on their experience of the inquest system. Arrangements are in place to ensure that inquests are held as quickly as possible; and bodies which are repatriated to the UK may now be transferred to the coroner's district of the final resting place to alleviate family members from having to travel long distances to the inquest.
	The Government's response to the Deepcut review accepted that there may be circumstances in which family attendance at a particular board of inquiry would be acceptable where it would not impede the proceedings of the board. We are developing a more open and inclusive approach to the family in relation to the conduct of the inquiry and there is now discretion for presidents to allow family attendance at boards of inquiry.
	Achieving real and lasting change in the Armed Forces will require sustained effort. We have introduced a successful programme of internal review and evaluation that is conducted by the Directorate of Individual Training Capability, whose role is to evaluate the implementation of policies relating to the individual training environment, enabling the identification of issues and for the sharing of good practice. In addition, our training organisations will remain open to external scrutiny, through the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skill organisation in April 2007. I would like to pay tribute to all those who have worked so hard across the services to bring about the necessary changes to improve the way in which we look after and train our young men and women.
	We will not forget the four young soldiers—Sean Benton, Cheryl James, Geoff Gray and James Collinson—who died at Deepcut but we are confident that we have done and continue to do all that we can to prevent such tragedies happening again.

Department for Work and Pensions: Agency Targets and Business Plans

Lord McKenzie of Luton: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (John Hutton) has made the following Statement.
	I am today able to announce the annual performance targets in 2007-08 for four of the executive agencies of the Department for Work and Pensions. The targets I have agreed are set out below.
	Further information on the plans of Jobcentre Plus, the Child Support Agency, Disability and Carers Service and The Rent Service in 2007-08 is contained in their individual business plans which have been published today. Copies have been placed in the Library and the Vote Office. The Pension Service targets and business plan will be published in due course.
	Jobcentre Plus
	
		
			 Job Outcome Target (JOT)* 2007-08 
			 To achieve a total points score of 11,200,000 based on the job outcomes Jobcentre Plus achieves 
			 *The JOT this year is not directly comparable with that set for 2006-07 due to technical and definitional adjustments. The 2006-07 target was based on limited baseline information and was set too high. 
		
	
	
		
			 Interventions Delivery Target*  
			 To make sure that specified key Jobcentre Plus labour market interventions take place within set timescales in 85 per cent of cases checked.  
			 Components Planning Assumption 
			 Labour market interventions 90 per cent 
			 Lone parent review/trigger work-focused interviews 85 per cent 
			 Jobseeker's allowance interventions (JSA 13- and 26-week interventions) 85 per cent 
			 Incapacity benefit (IB) interventions (initial IB work-focused interviews) 80 per cent 
			 * New target not comparable to former business delivery target.  
		
	
	
		
			 Average Actual Clearance Times 
			 To process claims within specified average actual clearance times (AACTs) for incapacity benefit (IB), income support (IS) and jobseeker's allowance (JSA)—18 days, 11 days and 12 days respectively. 
		
	
	
		
			 Monetary Value of Fraud and Error Target 
			 By March 2008, to continue to ensure that losses from fraud and error in working-age income support and jobseeker's allowance amount to less than current levels of loss as expressed in the new 2005-06 baseline. 
		
	
	
		
			 Customer Service Target 
			 To achieve an 84 per cent customer service level in the delivery of the standards set out in the customers and employers charters. 
		
	
	
		
			 Employer Outcome Target 
			 At least 84 per cent of employers placing their vacancies with Jobcentre Plus will have a positive outcome. 
		
	
	Child Support Agency
	The Secretary of State's targets have been designed to ensure that the agency is firmly on track to achieve its operational improvement plan commitments in this crucial second year of the programme. They are:
	
		
			 Number of children Maintenance will be collected or have been arranged by the agency on behalf of 720,000 children, as measured by the monthly average over the quarter ending March 2008. 
			 Total maintenance collection (Arrears) Collect or have arranged £970 million in child maintenance between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2008; of which at least £120 million will be arrears. 
			 Maintenance outcomes By 31 March 2008, in 66 per cent of cases across both the new and old schemes in which a liability to pay maintenance exists, the non-resident parent has either made a payment via the collection service or a maintenance direct arrangement is in place. 
			 Uncleared applications to the new scheme By 31 March 2008, the volume of uncleared new scheme applications will be no more than 140,000. 
		
	
	Disability and Carers Service
	
		
			 Performance Standards for 2007-08 
			 Ensure that at least 92 per cent of calls to the DLA/AA Helpline, our national telephone service, are answered first time. 
			 Ensure that less than 1 per cent of all calls attempted to the DLA/AA Helpline receive an engaged tone. 
			 Increase the percentage of customers satisfied with the service provided by DCS to 86 per cent. 
			 Clear new claims for DLA within an average of 38 or fewer working days; new claims for AA within an average of 18 days and CA within an average of 13.5 days. 
			 Achieve an accuracy rate of 90.5 per cent on decisions on claims for DLA. 
			 Achieve an accuracy rate of 92 per cent on decisions on claims for AA. 
			 Achieve a financial accuracy rate of 98 per cent on CA. 
			 Reduce sick absence to eight average working days lost. 
			 Meet the efficiency challenge by delivering a staffing level of 5,603. 
			 Reduce the cost of processing benefits to: DLA/AA claim £154.98*; DLA/AA load £7.80*; CA claim £80.72*; andCA load £11.05*. 
			 Number of DLA/AA cases referred to the tribunal service to be no more than 4.5 per cent of all cases. 
			 Of the referred cases heard by the tribunal service no more than  45 per cent to be overturned. 
			 * figures to be confirmed 
		
	
	The Rent Service
	Service Delivery
	
		
			 Customer Satisfaction 
			 Local Authority Housing Benefit Department Customers 
			 Ensure that at least 95 per cent of our local authority customers rate our service as satisfactory or better during the year. 
			 Fair Rent Customers and Housing Benefit Inspections 
			 Ensure that at least 95 per cent of our fair rent customers, and those housing benefit claimants whose properties we inspect, rate our service as satisfactory or better during the year. 
			 Quality 
			 95 per cent of all housing benefit determinations that are checked as part of our quality assurance processes are verified as being accurate. 
			 95 per cent of all fair rent valuations that are checked as part of our quality assurance processes are verified as being accurate. 
		
	
	Speed of Processing
	
		
			 Type of Determination Timescale for the Year 2007-08 Target Outturn 
			 Housing Benefit:   
			 With an inspection within 15 working days 94 per cent 
			 Without an inspection within 3 working days 94 per cent 
			 Pre-Tenancy within 4 working days 94 per cent 
			 Redetermination within 15 working days 94 per cent 
			 Fair Rents within 40 working days 94 per cent 
		
	
	Value for Money
	
		
			 Productivity 
			 To increase productivity by 5 per cent by the end of the year. 
		
	
	
		
			 Cost per case 
			 To reduce cost per case by 1.5 per cent in real terms by the end of the year. 
		
	
	
		
			 Sickness Absence 
			 To reduce average sick absence to no more than eight working days per employee per year.

Department for Work and Pensions: Social Fund Allocations

Lord McKenzie of Luton: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (James Plaskitt) has made the following Statement.
	I am pleased to announce that the gross discretionary Social Fund budget for 2007-08 will be £752 million.
	This includes a £50 million injection of net funding, being the second of three which in total comprise a substantial £210 million boost to support changes to the loans scheme.
	With the net funding available, I have been able to allocate a gross national loans budget of £610 million and a national community care grants budget of £141 million from 1 April 2007.
	£1 million will be retained centrally as a contingency reserve. For example, it is available to provide additional help to Jobcentre Plus budgets facing unexpected and unplanned expenditure.
	Details of individual budget allocations will be placed in the Library.
	The discretionary social fund budget is cash limited. Budgets are allocated to districts on 1 April each year. The gross discretionary social fund budget allocated for 2007-08 is £752 million made up of:
	new money (net AME) £228.2 million;
	forecast loan recovery £523.8 million.
	This was allocated as follows:
	loans £610 million;
	grants £141 million;
	contingency reserve £1 million.

Education: Diploma Gateway

Lord Adonis: My honourable friend the Minister for Schools and 14-19 Learners (Jim Knight) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I have today announced the outcome of the Diploma Gateway process to approve consortia to offer the first new diplomas to young people in selected areas of the country in September 2008. A list of the consortia and their approval status has been placed in the Library.
	The diplomas will broaden the options available to young people, encouraging more to continue learning for longer and gain the qualifications they need to progress into further and higher education, and employment. They are fundamental to our proposals on raising the participation age, as set out in last week's Green Paper Raising Expectations: staying in education and training post 16.
	The availability of the first 5 diploma lines from 2008 shows that we are on track with our priorities set out in our 14-19 Education and Skills Implementation Plan (2005).

EU: Berlin Declaration

Baroness Amos: EU heads of state and government met in Berlin over the weekend 24 to 25 March to mark the 50th anniversary of the Treaties of Rome. The Berlin declaration recalls the historic achievements of the past 50 years, and looks ahead to the challenges that we the countries of the European Union need to face together. Copies of the declaration have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

EU: Transport Council

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport (Douglas Alexander) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	I attended the transport session of the Transport, Telecommunications and Energy Council, held in Brussels on 22 March. The German Minister for Transport, Building and Urban Affairs, Mr Wolfgang Tiefensee, was in the chair.
	Two aspects of the Galileo satellite navigation programme were on the agenda.
	The presidency and Commission reported to the council on the current difficulties with the concession contract negotiations for the PPP and the impact on the overall development of the project. There has not been any recent progress on the negotiations because of internal problems among the partners in the consortium bidding to run the Galileo PPP. In the light of the delays, the presidency recently convened a meeting with the consortium but no satisfactory solution had been found to the current deadlock. At council, it was therefore necessary to consider what action could be taken to get the process back on track. The bidding consortium has now been given a deadline of 10 May 2007 to take the necessary measures to allow negotiations to move forwards effectively. If the deadline is not met, the Commission will begin to develop alternative options for taking forward the Galileo project. A more detailed discussion on these issues would then follow at the June Transport Council. Council conclusions, acceptable to the UK, were agreed to this end.
	The council adopted a decision setting out the framework for third country participation, as associated members, in the Galileo supervisory authority. The decision, with which the UK is content, authorises the Commission to open negotiations with non-EU countries that apply, with final approval resting with the council.
	There was unanimous support for an EU-US air services agreement. The presidency reported that, following the most recent negotiations with the US, the proposed text for a first stage agreement had been considerably improved and was a good starting point for reaching a full open aviation area. However, negotiations should resume quickly to make further progress on a second stage. A number of Ministers spoke to welcome the agreement. I pointed out that the UK accounts for a 40 per cent share of the EU-US market. The deal on the table did not go the full way to achieving a fully liberalised open aviation area, so it was essential to have a clear timetable for delivering a stage 2 agreement and have real leverage if the negotiations did not proceed as we wished. I proposed a mechanism be established for the automatic withdrawal of rights by the EU if an agreement had not been reached within the timetable set down in the draft agreement. Each member state would decide which rights it would wish to withdraw. This suspension would apply unless the council agreed unanimously otherwise. In addition, it was proposed that the start of the agreement be delayed until 30 March 2008 to give airports and airlines more time to prepare. These points were agreed and are reflected in the council conclusions, which were adopted unanimously.
	The council adopted a decision on the signature and provisional application of the agreement reached with Russia on Siberian overflights, including the establishment of a cost equalisation mechanism during the transitional period. We strongly welcome this agreement and support the decision.
	There was a debate on the contribution of the transport sector to the Lisbon Strategy. The presidency put questions to member states for this debate, focusing on how to stimulate consumer demand for cleaner vehicles and how to ensure that rail, shipping and inland waterways play their part. Most member states focused on the proven or potential benefits of: taxation measures for vehicles or fuels; alternative fuels (particularly biofuels); eco-driving; eco-labelling; information campaigns to buyers and drivers; and new technologies. The UK was among those which expressed support for the Commission's proposal for mandatory CO2 limits for cars and light vans, while pointing to the need to work towards even lower limits by 2020. The Commission summarised its plans for sustainable transport, including car CO2 reduction; an action plan for logistics and a green paper on urban transport; and binding biofuels targets.
	Under AOB, the Commission presented two recent communications: one on extension of trans-European transport axes to neighbouring countries, including those in Asia and Africa; and the other on the implementation of the SESAR programme for the modernisation of the European air traffic management system. The presidency is aiming for a decision at the Transport Council in June on the establishment of the SESAR joint undertaking.
	Among items adopted without debate was an amending regulation on the accelerated phasing-in of double-hull or equivalent design oil tankers.

Financial Inclusion and Pomeroy Review

Lord Davies of Oldham: My honourable friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Ed Balls) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Government are today publishing a document, Financial inclusion: the way forward, setting out general principles for their ongoing financial inclusion strategy.
	The Government have three goals for financial inclusion:
	that everyone should be able to manage their money effectively and securely through having access to a bank account, and the confidence and capability to get the most from it;that everyone should be able to plan for the future with a reasonable degree of security and therefore, affordable credit, saving accounts and simple insurance products should be available to all who need them; andthat everyone should have the information, support and confidence they need to prevent avoidable financial difficulty, and to know where to turn if they do find themselves in financial distress.
	Financial inclusion: the way forward affirms the Government's commitment to promoting financial inclusion in the next spending period. From 2008 to 2011, financial inclusion policy will be supported through a new Financial Inclusion Fund. While the amount of the fund will be determined after the Comprehensive Spending Review, the current level of intensity of action to promote financial inclusion will be maintained.
	A detailed action plan will be developed by a cross-departmental ministerial working group, which will report after the Comprehensive Spending Review. The Financial Inclusion Taskforce, which monitors progress and advises the Government on financial inclusion policy, will be extended until March 2011.
	The document also announces further spending on financial inclusion in 2007-08. £6 million will be made available to the Department for Work and Pensions to support credit unions and community development finance institutions in making affordable credit and banking services available to financially excluded consumers.
	The document details progress made to date with financial inclusion objectives. The Government agreed a goal, shared with the banks, to halve the number of people living without access to a bank account. The number of adults living in households without access to a bank account fell from 2.8 million in 2002-03, to 2 million in 2005-06. The number of unbanked households also fell from 1.9 million to 1.3 million during the same period. Steady progress is being made with Government's shared goal.
	The document announces the Government's continued commitment to working with banks and other financial services providers to reduce the number of unbanked people further, and to promote wider financial inclusion. The Government have asked senior representatives from the banking sector to work with the Financial Inclusion Taskforce to consider how to achieve a nationwide increase in the coverage and capacity of third-sector lenders such as credit unions.
	As announced in the 2006 Pre-Budget Report, the Government asked Brian Pomeroy, Chair of the Financial Inclusion Taskforce, to conduct a review of Christmas savings clubs and hamper schemes. Following the collapse of Farepak in November 2006, the purpose of this review was to increase understanding of who uses these schemes and why, and to consider how the saving needs of this group of consumers might be better met by mainstream financial products. The review is published today by the Treasury.
	The Government have responded to the recommendations made in the review in today's financial inclusion document. Their response includes an announcement that the Department of Trade and Industry has secured agreement from the hamper industry to establish an industry-led scheme to ensure that consumers' interests are fully protected. The scheme will establish secure, ring-fenced accounts, and will be implemented as soon as possible.
	The Government also announce that £1 million will be made available to the Office of Fair Trading to run a consumer awareness campaign. This campaign will inform consumers of the options available to them, including mainstream accounts, for saving towards Christmas.
	Other responses to the Pomeroy review from the Government were as follows:
	the OFT has agreed to investigate the findings of the Pomeroy review in full, and whether a further inquiry into competition in the market for Christmas saving schemes is needed;following encouragement and support from the Government, credit unions are now offering Christmas saving accounts with a lock-in. The Post Office also has plans to launch a Christmas saving account. The Government have asked the Financial Inclusion Taskforce to monitor developments, and consider what further detailed actions are needed to expand community-based provision of saving;the Thoresen review of a national approach to generic financial advice will consider how to provide better generic advice on informal saving;the Government's financial inclusion campaign, "Now let's talk money", is working with local charities and community organisations to promote credit unions as an alternative to hamper schemes;the FSA will enhance the saving information on its MoneyMadeClear website by including information about Christmas hamper schemes; andthe new Wealth and Assets Survey will collect information on informal saving. The Government will use the first results of the survey, due by the end of the year, to inform any further data gathering.
	The Treasury Committee conducted an inquiry into financial inclusion in the spring of 2006, and published three reports detailing its findings, in November and December 2006. The Government have sent their response to the inquiry to the Treasury Committee today.
	Copies of both Financial inclusion: the way forward and the Pomeroy review of Christmas savings are available in the Vote Office and in the Library of the House.

Highway Code

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Transport (Stephen Ladyman) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	I have today laid before both Houses of Parliament a draft revised edition of the Highway Code containing alterations proposed to be made by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State pursuant to Section 38 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. In accordance with Section 38 of the 1988 Act, the proposed revision will not be made until after the end of a period of 40 days beginning with the day on which the alterations were laid.
	The draft revised edition of the Highway Code takes account of responses to the public consultation held between February and May 2006.
	I have also today published the response to consultation, reporting on the results of the consultation on the proposed revision of the Highway Code.
	The most significant issues raised during consultation were:
	a variety of cycling-related issues;stopping distances; and road users' attitudes and greater consideration for vulnerable road users.
	Copies of the response to consultation have been placed in the Library of each House of Parliament.
	The response to consultation is also available from the DSA website at www.dsa.gov.uk: or by telephone on 01234 744054.
	The revised Highway Code is planned for publication in summer 2007.

Highways Agency: Correction to Written Answers

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Transport (Stephen Ladyman) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	My Answer to Parliamentary Questions UIN 126098 (Official Report, 9 March 2007, cols. 2262-4W) regarding traffic volumes for each concrete section of the national trunk road network and UIN 126096 (Official Report, 12 March 2007, cols. 20-2W) regarding the proportion of the concreted trunk road network which has had quieter surfacing installed since July 2005, contained several inaccuracies.
	The Answer to the Parliamentary Questions should have read:
	
	The table below gives the annual average daily traffic (AADT) data for each concrete surfaced section of the all purpose national trunk road network for 2005.
	
		
			 Route Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) 
			 A5 Knowl Hill, Milton Keynes 35,699 
			 A11 Barton Mills Bypass, Suffolk 38,100 
			 A11 Wymondham Bypass, Norfolk 35,400 
			 A11 Wymondham to A47 Thickthorn, Norfolk 35,400 
			 A12 Chelmsford Bypass, Essex 62,000 
			 A12 Hatfield Peverel and Witham (South), Essex 78,700 
			 A12 Margaretting Bypass, Essex 73,100 
			 A12 Rivenhall End and Kelvedon Bypass, Essex 78,700 
			 A12 Stanway Bypass, Essex 87,800 
			 A13 82,000* 
			 A14 Haughley New Street Bypass, Suffolk 40,200 
			 A14 Ipswich South-Eastern Bypass (Orwell Bridge to Levington), Suffolk 53,400 
			 A14 Ipswich South-Western Bypass (Copdock to Orwell Bridge), Suffolk 53,400 
			 A14 Ipswich Western Bypass (Claydon to Copdock), Suffolk 47,000 
			 A19 Billingham Bypass 60,600 (16 per cent HGV) 
			 A30 Honiton to Exeter 28,500 
			 A30 Longrock 23,500 
			 A30 Whiddon Down 22,700 
			 A35 Tolpuddle/Puddletown 25,000 
			 A46: Willoughby-on-the-Wolds to Six Hills—dual carriageway. Nearest town—between Bingham and Leicester. County—Leicestershire 24,000 
			 A47 Dereham Bypass 22,000 
			 A50 Doveridge Bypass 42,051 
			 A50 Derby Southern Bypass 50,919 
			 A50 Foston Hatton Hilton Bypass 38,245 
			 A50 Blythe Bridge to Uttoxeter 32,918 
			 A52: Bottesford Bypass—single carriageway. Nearest town—between Radcliffe-on-Trent and Grantham County—Leicestershire 16,500 
			 A120 Colchester Eastern Bypass 13,200 
			 A120 Wix Bypass 13,200 
			 A160-A160 between A1077 and A180 12,000 (44 per cent HGV) 
			 A180-A180 between A1136 and A1173 30,300 (16 per cent HGV) 
			 A180-A180 between A1136 and A180 30,800 (15 per cent HGV) 
			 A180-A180 between A1173 and A160 22,100 (19 per cent HGV) 
			 A180-A180 between A160 and M180 J5 No AADT data 
			 A303 between A356 & A358 (WB) 12,595 
			 A303 between A358 & A356 (E/B) 12,996 
			 A419/A417 DBFO concrete carriageway 29,894 
			 A483 Pulford Island to Welsh Border No count information for 2005, AADT 2004 was 48,700. 
			 * no AADT available. Figure provided is an actual traffic flow for October 2005 
		
	
	The table below gives the annual average daily traffic (AADT) data for each concrete surfaced section of the motorway network for 2005.
	
		
			 Route Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) 
			 M1 A1 link J47-48N, A1M J44 65,800 (17 per cent HGV) 
			 M1 A1 link J46-47 67,300 (17 per cent HGV) 
			 M1 A1 link J44-45 80,900 (17 per cent HGV) 
			 M1 A1 link J43-44 67,500 (18 per cent HGV) 
			 M1 A1 link J42-43 132,600 (15 per cent HGV) 
			 M1 A1 link J45-46 79,900 (17 per cent HGV) 
			 M1 J5-8 105,000 
			 M3 J8 north of J9 57,000 
			 M4 J10 No AADT data available 
			 M6 J12-13 117,849 
			 M11 J6-5 71,000 
			 M11 J8-9 (final phase) 67,483 
			 M18 J5 48,900 (22 per cent HGV) 
			 M18 J5-6 47,600 (26 per cent HGV) 
			 M18 J6-7 44,100 (24 per cent HGV) 
			 M20 J8-9 56,000 
			 M25 J8-9 152,000 
			 M25 J9-10 153,000 
			 M25 J10-11 164,000 
			 M25 J24-25 127,000 
			 M25 J27-28 129,000 
			 M26 J2a-3 48,000 
			 M27 J5-7 122,000 
			 M42 J3a-4* 126,800 
			 M42 J9-10 35,253 
			 M53 J11-12 No data for J11-12 so J10-11 used 62,300 
			 M54 J2-3 50,300 
			 M54 J3-4 50,100 
			 M54 J4-5 41,800 
			 M56 J15-16 No data for J15-16 so J14-15 used 96,700 
			 M60 J1-2 125,600 
			 M271 (north of M27 J3) 122,000 
			 M271 (south of M27 J3) 14,000 
			 * M42 J3a-4 was identified in the 2003 Ministerial announcement, however, this location is within the ATM section and resurfacing with low noise surfacing has been delayed due to the data collection of ATM traffic flow figures. 
		
	
	
	The Highways Agency has a policy of using quieter surfaces as a matter of course whenever a road needs to be resurfaced. Since July 2000 approximately 35 per cent of the concrete sections of the strategic road network have been surfaced with quieter materials.
	Tables (A) and (B) indicate concrete sections surfaced and sections not surfaced respectively.
	
		
			 Table A— Concrete sections surfaced with quieter materials 
			 Year Scheme 
			 1999-00 M20 Junctions 3-5 
			 2000-01 M20 Junctions 9-10 
			 2001-02 No schemes c 
			 2002-03 M180 Junction 2 to Beltoft 
			  A12 Brentwood Bypass Phase 2 
			  M11 Junction 8 (Stanstead Slip Rd Contract) 
			  M20 Junction 11-Smeeth 
			  M27 Junctions 2-4 
			  M11 Junctions 7-6 southbound 
			  M5 Junctions 26-27 Contract 1 
			 2003-04 A1 Long Bennington (additional stretch to April 2003 announcement) 
			  M42 Junctions 2-3a 
			  M180 Sandtoft-Junction 2 
			  M11 B1038 (Newport) A11 (M11 Junction 9 Junction 8 Phase 1) (new scheme from Oct 2001 announcement) 
			  M1 Junctions 1-2 
			  M20 Junctions 11a-11 
			  M20 Junctions 13-11a 
			  M25 Junctions 26-27 
			  M5 Junctions 26-27 Contract 2 
			  M5 Junctions 27 south to Willand (additional stretch to April 2003 announcement) 
			  A12 Witham-Kelvedon 
			 2004-05 M11 Junction 6 (additional stretch to April 2003 announcement) 
			  A1(M) Junction 1 (South Mimms) 
			  M4 Junction 10 slip roads—phase 1 
			  A27 Chichester to Havant (phases 1 & 2) 
			  A1 North Muskham to Carlton on Trent (phases 1 & 2) 
			  M5 J26 — J27 Contract 3 
			  M69 Junction 2-M1 Contract 1 
			 2005-06 A180 Habrough to Stallingborough (new scheme from Oct 2001 announcement) 
			  M62 Gilberdyke to Newport (additional stretch to April 2003 announcement) 
			  A1 North Muskham to Carlton on Trent  (phase 3) 
			  A27 Chichester to Havant (phase 3) 
			  M20 Junction 3-A20 West Kingstown 
			  A34 Peartree to Weston 
			  A36: M27 roundabout to Circuit Road roundabout (additional stretch to April 2003 announcement) 
			 2006-07 A1 Coddington to Balderton 
			  A1 Coddington to Balderton phase 2  (March 07) 
			  M11 J9-8 phase 2 (B1038 Newport-Ugley) 
			  M6 Junction 12 to Penkridge 
		
	
	
		
			 Table B—Concrete sections not re-surfaced with quieter materials 
			 Concrete Road Section Description Concrete Section Length—km 
			 M1-A1 link 15.5 
			 M20 Junctions 8-9 20.4 
			 M25 Junctions 9-10 7.8 
			 M27 Junctions 5-7 5.7 
			 M60 J1-2 concrete overlay 1.7 
			 A5 Milton Keynes (A422-A508) 6.3 
			 A11: B1172-A47 13.7 
			 A12 Ingateston-Margaretting 4.4 
			 A12 Hatfield Peverel-Witham 5.2 
			 A13: A1306-M25 J30 3 
			 A14 Claydon-B1067 Underbridge 3 
			 A30 Honiton-Exeter 16.2 
			 A47 East Dereham: East Dereham-B1135 3.3 
			 A50: Doveridge Bypass 4 
			 A419/A417 Cirencester & Latton Bypasses 14.2 
			 M42 Junctions 9-10 5.1 
			 M6 Penkridge to Junction 13 3.8 
			 M18 Junctions 5-6 2.3 
			 M25 Junctions 10-11 9.2 
			 M25 Junctions 24-25 8.5 
			 M25 Junctions 8-9 7.2 
			 M42 Junctions 3a-4 3.5 
			 M54: A5-A41 9.3 
			 M271 Junctions 1 to A3057 2.8 
			 A11-Barton Mills 2.8 
			 A12 Contract 11: Kelvedon Bypass-Eight Ash Green 7.7 
			 A12 Margaretting-Boreham 13.4 
			 A14 B1067 Underbridge-Copdock Interchange 3.3 
			 A14 Copdock Interchange-A12 8 
			 A19 Billingham Bypass 4.2 
			 A30 Longrock Bypass 1.8 
			 A35 Tolpuddle-Puddletown 7.2 
			 A50 Derby Southern Bypass 0.5 
			 A52 Bottesford Bypass 4.8 
			 A120 Elmstead-Wix eastbound 3.5 
			 A483: B5445-Welsh boundary 3.1 
			 M3 Junctions 8-9 9 
			 M4 Junction 10 slip roads-phase 2 0.5 
			 M11 Junctions 5-6 4.7 
			 M18 Moorends-Greenland 4.9 
			 M25 Junctions 27-28 5.6 
			 M26-J2A to M20 concrete and EB overlay (MP 14/6 TO 15/9) 0.8 
			 M53 Junctions 11-12 (A56-M56) 3.9 
			 M54: A41-A449 12.9 
			 M56 Junction 15 (M53)-A5117 3 
			 A14 A12 Levington 3.7 
			 A14 Elmswell 3.6 
			 A30 Whiddon Down to Okehampton 6.9 
			 A46 Six Hills-Widmerpool 9.5 
			 A47 East Dereham: Wending-East Dereham 4.3 
			 A50 Blythe Bridge to Uttoxeter 12.4 
			 A50: Foston Hatton Hilton Bypass 3.6 
			 A120: A12-Elmstead 4.5 
			 A160: A1077-A180 4.4 
			 A180: Habrough to Grimsby 11.5 
			 A180:M180-Ulceby 8 
			 A303 Illminster Bypass 8.8 
			 M1 J5-8 (SB) 8 
			 M11 J8-9 (final phase) 7

Immigration: Securing the UK Border

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My honourable friend the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Nationality (Mr Liam Byrne) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today publishing a new strategy entitled Securing the UK Border, the terms of reference for the new Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), a summary of the responses received to our recent consultation on establishing a Migration Advisory Committee, and terms of reference for a new Migration Impacts Forum. Copies of all documents have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	Effective immigration systems require effective controls. The Securing the UK Border strategy is the third in the series of papers setting out how we will henceforth create a new offshore border control system, and strengthen UK border security here at home. It sets out how we intend to strengthen our borders against those who seek to abuse our laws and present a threat to our security while at the same time making the system simpler and faster for legitimate, low-risk travellers. The main proposals include:
	Visa Waiver Test: we will henceforth assume that all non-EEA countries will face a visa regime unless they meet a sufficient benchmark against a basket of immigration, crime, security and economic criteria. A test will be conducted over 2007 with regimes maintained, lifted or imposed during 2008-09. In tandem, we will be reviewing the transit-without-visa concession and the direct-airside-transit-visa regime;
	Biometric capture: underpinning our proposals is the need to establish the identity of those seeking to travel to the UK. We will therefore capture the biometrics of all non-EEA passengers before travel to the UK or on arrival;
	Visitors: we want to make the rights and obligations of those visiting the UK clearer and more transparent. During 2007, we will consult on the creation of distinct and separate routes for those coming for six months or less as tourists, business visitors and sponsored family visitors;
	Forced Marriage: we will also consult on the introduction of measures to address the problem of forced marriage, including raising the minimum age for spouse and sponsor and examining the case for introducing some form of English language test prior to entry for those spouses intending to settle.
	We are committed to attracting people with the skills Britain needs from around the world. With our policy set, a points-based system will, starting from next year, ensure that we only admit to work and study those migrants with a contribution to make to Britain.
	We believe that the UK would benefit greatly from advice from a new committee of independent experts about where migration is of benefit to Britain and where it is not. There has been a full consultation on our proposals and the response I am publishing today shows strong support from the public.
	The Migration Advisory Committee will be a non-statutory advisory non-departmental public body established from April 2007. It will provide independent and evidence-based advice to Government on specific sectors and occupations in the labour market where shortages exist which can sensibly be filled by migration. In addition, the Government may, from time to time, ask the MAC to advise on other matters relating to migration.
	Alongside the MAC we are also establishing a new Migration Impacts Forum (MIF) which will provide us with information and input from interested parties on the wider impacts of migration. I will co-chair this body with my honourable friend the member for Oldham East and Saddleworth and will invite membership from among those with a direct interest in issues associated with the wider impacts of migration from across the UK.
	I am also announcing today a number of changes to the immigration rules relating to ministers of religion and international students, including an extension of the Science and Engineering Graduates Scheme and the Fresh Talent: Working in Scotland Scheme.

Land Registry: Key Performance Indicators and Targets

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The following list sets out the key performance indicators that have been set for Her Majesty's Land Registry for 2007-08.
	Customer Service
	Speed: percentage of official copy and search applications processed within two working days: 98 per cent; percentage of all registrations processed within 18 working days: 80 per cent.Accuracy: Percentage of registrations processed free of any error: 98.5 per cent. Overall Satisfaction1:percentage of customers who, overall, are very satisfied/satisfied with the full range of services provided by Land Registry: better than 95 per cent.Financial
	Percentage return on average capital employed: 3.5 per cent.
	Efficiency2
	Cost per unit in cash terms3 (real terms)4: £29.95 (£20.61)
	Strategic Development Areas
	Customer Service:
	provide a sustainable and scaleable e-security infrastructure solution, providing role-based access, identity management and future e-signature functionality for Land Registry's external and business customer base.
	Land Registration:
	add a further 550,000 hectares of land to the total areas of registered freehold land in England and Wales.
	Electronic Service Delivery:
	Complete a review of responses to the consultation paper on the Land Registration (Network Access) Rules and the Land Registration (Electronic Communications) Order and report to Ministers.
	Other Business Development:
	Move the Land Registry corporate website to the new portal and establish the portal for the use of one or more of the following segments; citizens, conveyancers, lenders, estate agents.
	1 Result from quarterly satisfaction.
	2 Agreed with HM Treasury on 20 December 2006.
	3 Based on the GDP deflator issued by HM Treasury on 21 December 2006 (base year 1992-93).
	4 The real term unit cost in the base year of 1992-93 was £30.65.
	
		
			  Target 2006-07 Performance as at Jan 2007 (unless otherwise stated) Target 2007-08 
			 Customer Service 
			 Speed 
			 Percentage of official copy and search applications processed within two working days 98 98 98 
			 Percentage of all registrations processed within 18 working days 80 88.6 80 
			 Accuracy 
			 Percentage of registrations processed free of any error 98.5 98.85 98.5 
			 Overall Satisfaction1 
			 Percentage of customers who, overall, are very satisfied/satisfied with the full range of services provided by Land Registry Better than 95 per cent 98.5 Better than 95 per cent 
			 Financial 
			 Percentage return on average capital employed 3.5 per cent 17.6 3.5 per cent 
			 Efficiency2 
			 Cost per unit in cash terms3 (real terms) 4 £29.95 (£21.17) £25.93 (£18.33) Cost per unit in cash terms 3 £29.95 (real terms)4 (20.61) 
			 1 Result from quarterly satisfaction survey (Ytd Quarter 3), next result due April 2007 
			 2 This is a final year target towards the HM Treasury-agreed cost per unit target for 2006-07 of £29.95 in cash terms (£21.17 in real terms). Target adjusted for revised pension costs. 
			 3 Based on the GDP deflator issued by HM Treasury on 21 December 2006 (base year 1992-03) 
			 4 The real term unit cost in the base year of 1992-93 was £30.65 
		
	
	
		
			 Strategic Development Areas  Strategic Development Areas 
			 Customer Service 
			 Introduce imagery bases access to Land Register Online Achieved Provide a sustainable and scaleable e security infrastructure solution, providing role-based access, identity management and future e-signature functionality, for Land Registry's external and business customer base. 
			 Land Registration 
			 Add a further 700,000 hectares5 of land to the total areas of registered freehold land in England and Wales Achieved Add a further 550,000 hectares of land to the total areas of registered freehold land in England and Wales 
			 Electronic Service Delivery 
			 Introduce a prototype chain matrix service to provide transparency to residential conveyancing chains On target Complete a review of responses to the consultation paper on the Land Registration (Network Access) Rules and the Land Registration (Electronic Communications) Order and report to Ministers. 
			 Other Business Development 
			 Establish a Land Registry portal as a first step in implementing a single integrated customer interface for all online Land Registry information and services. Achieved Carry out the migration of all Land Register Online services to the Land Registry portal

Members' and Peers' Correspondence

Lord Davies of Oldham: My honourable friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster is today publishing a report on departments' and agencies' performance on handling Members' and Peers' correspondence during 2006. Details are set out in the attached table. Figures for 2005 were published on 30 March 2006, (Official Report, col. WS 75). Departmental figures are based on substantive replies unless otherwise indicated.
	The footnotes to the table provide general background information on how the figures have been compiled.
	
		
			 Correspondence from MPs and Peers to Ministers and Agency Chief Executivesi 2006 
			 Department or Agency Target set for reply (working days) Number of letters received Percentage of replies with target 
			 Cabinet Office 15 962 ii 83 
			 Department for Communities and Local Government iii 15 11,168 42 iv 
			 Planning Inspectorate 10 228 77 
			 Ordnance Survey 15 66 100 
			 Department for Constitutional Affairs 20 3,524 84 
			 HM Courts Service 15 54 96 
			 Tribunals Service v 10 1,969 92 
			 Land Registry 20 59 95 
			 Public Guardianship Office 15 53 96 
			 Crown Prosecution Service 15 569 97 
			 Department for Culture, Media and Sport 20 4,199 76 
			 Ministry of Defence 15 7,001 vi 62 vii 
			 Armed Forces Personnel Administration Agency 15 153 97 
			 Defence Vetting Agency 7 24 100 
			 Veterans Agency 15 881 99 
			 Department for Education and Skills 15 17,240 73 viii 
			 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 15 12,475 53 ix 
			 Rural Development Service x 15 68 31 
			 Rural Payments Agency 15 1,536 22 xi 
			 Pesticide Safety Directorate 15 51 47 10 
			 State Veterinary Service 15 19 26 10 
			 Veterinary Medicines Directorate 20 26 65 10 
			 Food Standards Agency 20 410 * 62 xii 
			 * Letters where Health Ministers have replied 10 51 ** 92 
			 ** Letters where Chief Executive/Chairman has replied
			 Foreign and Commonwealth Office 20 11,970 89 
			 UK Visas 15 7,711 * 78 
			 * Letters where UK Visa officials have replied 20 953 ** 80 
			 ** Letters where FCO Ministers have replied
			 Department of Health 20 23,053 89 
			 * Letters received by the Chief Medical Officer and responded directly to MPs. 20 28 75 * 
			 ** Letters received by the NHS Chief Executive and responded directly to MPs. 20 44 89 ** 
			 Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency 20 212 84 
			 *** Letters received by Agency Chief Executive and responded on behalf of DH Ministers 20 30 87 *** 
			 NHS Purchasing and Supplies Agency. 20 15 80 
			 Home Office (non IND correspondence) xiii 15 9,583 93 
			 Criminal Records Bureau 10 378 XIV 93 
			 Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) 20 41,534 78 
			 HM Prison Service 20 1,004 97 
			 Identity and Passport Service xv 10 679 68 
			 Department for International Development 15 5,094 76 
			 Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Lord's Office 15 110 90 
			 Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers 20 375 71 
			 Northern Ireland Office 10 506 67 
			 Compensation Agency 7 39 85 xvi 
			 Northern Ireland Prison Service 10 34 85 
			 Office of the Leader of the House of Commons 15 418 96 
			 HM Revenue and Customs 18 5,327 60 
			 * Local Office and "delegated" figures (where local tax offices have replied directly to MPs) 18 1,956 * 54 
			 Scotland Office 15 39 77 
			 Department of Trade and Industry 15 12,780 71 
			 Companies House 10 54 100 
			 Employment Tribunals Service xvii 12 12 100 
			 Insolvency Service 10 559 98 
			 Department for Transport 15 9,944 76 
			 Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency 7 1,274 79 
			 Driving Standards Agency 15 71 83 
			 Highways Agency 15 347 96 
			 Maritime and Coastguard Agency 10 12 83 
			 Vehicle and Operator Services Agency 15 25 100 
			 HM Treasury 15 4,281 85 xvii 
			 National Savings and Investments 15 43 93 
			 Office for National Statistics 15 105 85 
			  10 108 xix 71 
			 Valuation Office 18 13 84 
			 Treasury Solicitor's Department 10 26 100 
			 Wales Office 15 148 86 
			 Department for Work and Pensions 20 13,140 90 
			 Appeals Service xx 15 20 90 
			 Child Support Agency 15 5,235 94 
			 Debt Management 15 11 100 
			 Disability and Carers Service 15 467 100 
			 Health and Safety Executive 15 145 90 
			 Jobcentre Plus 15 1,445 92 
			 The Pension Service 15 767 96 
			 i Departments and Agencies which received 10 MPs/Peers letters or fewer are not shown in this table. Holding or interim replies are not included unless otherwise indicated. The report does not include correspondence considered as Freedom of Information requests. 
			 ii Office of the Third Sector and the Social Exclusion Unit are included from May 2006. 
			 iii DCLG was established in May 2006. 
			 iv Drop in performance caused by several planning campaigns and a higher volume of correspondence. New arrangements have been introduced to improve performance. 
			 v The Tribunals Service was formed in April 2006 and incorporates the former Employment Tribunal Service. 
			 vi Database is unable to differentiate between letters from MPs/Peers and other correspondence, including FOI requests. Figures are therefore for all letters which received a ministerial reply. The AFPAA and DVA do not include FOI requests. 
			 vii Drop in performance caused by an increased volume of correspondence and the introduction of a new database in September 2006 to record and track correspondence. 
			 viii Drop in performance caused by technical difficulties following the implementation of a new handling system. Since August 2006, performance has increased to 93 per cent. 
			 ix There was a marked increase in correspondence in the first half of the year. In April 2006 a fully centralised system and changes in the correspondence handling system were introduced. 
			 x Only includes figures from January to October when the Rural Development Service merged with English Nature and the Countryside Agency to form Natural England. Natural England is an NDPB so will not be included in future lists. 
			 xi New procedures have been implemented to tackle and improve performance from 2007. 
			 xii From 1 Feb 2007 FSA correspondence has been processed though the DH Customer Service Centre, which it is hoped will lead to improved performance. 
			 xiii Active Communities Directorate included until May 2006, when it transferred to the Office of the Third Sector in the Cabinet Office. 
			 xiv These figures are from February 2006 when a new correspondence team was established. 
			 xv The UK Passport Service became the Identity and Passport Service in April 2006. 
			 xvi Drop in performance caused by complex correspondence. 
			 xvii Figures are from 1 January to 2 April 2006, when the Employment Tribunals Service became part of the Tribunals Service. 
			 xviii Database can not differentiate between correspondence received from MP/Peers and others so figure includes all letters receiving a ministerial reply. 
			 xix Figures are where the National Statistician replied on the Ministers' behalf. Figures are for all correspondence not just that received from MPs and Peers. 
			 xx Figures are from January to 2 April 2006, when the Appeals Service became part of the Tribunals Service.

Ministry of Defence: Agency Changes

Lord Drayson: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement:
	With effect from 1 April 2007, the Defence Procurement Agency (DPA), the British Forces Post Office (BFPO), the Defence Communication Services Agency (DCSA), the Disposal Services Agency (DSA), Defence Estates (DE), the Defence Bills Agency (DBA) and the Duke of York's Royal Military School (DYRMS) will cease to hold agency status. It has also been decided that the Defence Diversification Agency (DDA) should be closed later this year.
	Given that many of the reasons for making these organisations agencies are now embedded in the wider department, particularly for those that are also top level budgets, agency status now adds little value.
	In recognition of this, the "Enabling Acquisition Change" (EAC) report of June 2006 recommended that, in creating a new integrated procurement and support organisation, neither the new organisation (Defence Equipment & Support) nor any of its sub-divisions should retain agency status. Agency status is accordingly being removed not only from the DPA, which is currently a top level budget, but also from the BFPO, DCSA and DSA. Only the Defence Storage and Distribution Agency will retain its agency status in the new Defence Equipment & Support organisation.
	Agency status will also be removed from DE, which will remain a top level budget. Oversight of DE by the Defence Estates Committee will also continue.
	Removal of agency status from the DBA has been precipitated by the advent of MoD's new financial management Shared Service Centre, which has responsibility for end-to-end accounting processes.
	Removal of agency status from the DYRMS will bring it into line with other state-maintained boarding schools.
	In addition, although the Defence Diversification Agency (DDA) does not have the same formal agency status as the organisations mentioned above, the department also wishes to announce the conclusions of the consultation process into its future, which began last September.
	The DDA was formed in 1999 to encourage the civil exploitation of defence technology; help inform industry about MoD's future equipment needs; and facilitate the spin-in of civil technology to defence. However, since it was formed, the environment in which it operates has fundamentally changed.
	Regarding the civil exploitation of defence technology, the creation of QinetiQ in July 2001 transferred three-quarters of the MoD's Science and Technology base directly into a company with strong commercial incentives to exploit defence technologies in civil markets. In 2005, the MoD's Defence Science and Technology Laboratory established Ploughshare Innovation Ltd as a direct route for diversification and commercial exploitation of its intellectual property. Ploughshare has demonstrated growing success in this role: developing new licensing agreements; managing a technology innovation fund, and creating three new spin-out companies
	In terms of spinning-in new technology, the MoD's research programme has been progressively opened to competition, encouraging a broader range of suppliers to become directly involved in the supply of defence technology. Recent initiatives, such as the formation of defence technology centres and the "Competition of Ideas", have also provided new ways to encourage innovation. On the equipment side, the recent review of acquisition policy supports the conclusion that, the route to market for small and medium-sized enterprises in defence should be via prime contractors rather than directly to the department.
	When it comes to informing industry about the department's requirements, there have also been significant changes since the formation of the DDA. The Defence Industrial Strategy in 2005 set out publicly the technologies and capabilities required to support future defence requirements. In 2006, the Defence Technology Strategy identified our priorities for research and development. It identifies the actions the defence sector must take to maintain an appropriate level of R&D investment in those areas key to defence capability and national competitiveness. Taken together, these strategies, and the work in hand across MoD to implement them, generate a more direct engagement with industry than was possible through the DDA.
	Consultation on the future of the DDA has included discussions with industry, defence trade associations and trade unions. Our conclusion is that, given the changes over the past eight years which have embedded diversification into the department's wider activities, there is no longer a requirement for a separate organisation to facilitate the diversification role. Consequently, the department has decided to proceed with the closure of the DDA.
	The DDA has been a good champion for diversification, and we would like to thank the director and staff for their significant contribution. Attempts will now start to find alternative employment for the 35 staff, most of whom are on secondment from other organisations. We will engage with stakeholders to ensure that remaining issues are resolved effectively, and that the value of information generated within the DDA is not lost. In parallel with this announcement, the department will be writing in more detail to the DDA's stakeholders.
	This decision does not lessen the Government's commitment to diversification and technology transfer. As highlighted in the Defence Industrial Strategy this remains an important objective and one which we are fully committed to meeting through the mechanisms which I have described above. These initiatives are all evidence of the continuing importance we place on maintaining momentum in this key area.

NHS: Budget

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Health (Patricia Hewitt) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am pleased to announce changes to the resource accounting and budgeting (RAB) regime for National Health Service trusts and the impact this will have on the financial position of affected NHS trusts in 2006-07. I am also announcing the allocation of the £450 million reserve to the NHS.
	The NHS financial position has shown a massive improvement since last year. A deficit of £547 million has been transformed into a small surplus as reported on 20 February 2007 by the department in the report NHS Financial Performance Quarter Three 2006-07, which is available in the Library.
	This improved performance of the NHS overall means that we are now confident that we can move NHS trusts out of the RAB regime. This means that NHS trusts will no longer have their income reduced for overspends in the previous year.
	This does not mean we are writing off the deficits of overspending NHS trusts, which will still need to generate surpluses to meet their statutory duty. What has been eliminated is the double effect of having both an income reduction and then having to generate a surplus.
	This is in line with recommendations set out by the Audit Commission in its Review of the NHS Financial Management and Accounting Regime, published in July 2006.
	In line with these changes, we are reversing income deductions imposed on NHS trusts in 2006-07 under the old RAB regime as a consequence of overspends in 2005-06. This totals £178 million and benefits 28 NHS trusts, as set out in table 1 below.
	In support of this change, I am also pleased to announce that we can now allocate the £450 million contingency to the NHS. This is being allocated to strategic health authorities (SHAs) on a fair shares basis meaning that the most needy areas of the country will receive a larger share of the funding in line with the our needs-based resource allocation formula. Details of the allocation by SHA and the effect this has on the financial position of each SHA economy, as reported at quarter three, is given in table 2 below.
	The first call on this funding is to reverse the £178 million RAB deductions made to NHS trusts in 2006-07. The balance is available to begin to reverse the funding top-sliced from PCT allocations to create SHA level reserves.
	As a result of these and earlier reforms, the NHS now has a financial system that ensures fairness, transparency and responsibility. Organisations can now understand clearly their financial performance and the consequences and benefits of the management decisions they make. This gives us the firm basis to go forward and continue transforming the services we provide for patients by implementing policies such as 18 weeks.
	
		
			 Table 1: Impact on 2006-07 forecast outturn at NHS trust level of the reversal of 2006-07 RAB income deductions applied to NHS trusts in respect of 2005-06 deficits 
			 NHS trust name Forecast outturn surplus/(deficit) as reported at quarter three Net RAB deductions applied to NHS trusts in 2006-07 Forecast Outturn surplus/(deficit) reported at quarter three after the reversal of RAB reduction 
			  £000s £000s £000s 
			 University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust -6,357 -6,357 0 
			 Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust -13,000 -12,304 -696 
			 Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust -13,500 -1,500 -12,000 
			 Worcestershire MH Partnership NHS Trust -3,084 -1,592 -1,492 
			 Cambs & Peterborough MH Partnership NHS Trust 500 -325 825 
			 Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust -29,902 -8,101 -21,801 
			 Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust -15,800 -14,020 -1,780 
			 Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust 3,150 -876 4,026 
			 Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust -1,500 -5,857 4,357 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital Kings Lynn NHS Trust -10,986 -11,010 24 
			 Suffolk MH Partnership NHS Trust 1,200 -797 1,997 
			 West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust -11,100 -12,027 927 
			 Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust -12,894 -14,123 1,229 
			 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust -25,619 -24,064 -1,555 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust -36,079 -23,420 -12,659 
			 The Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust -11,956 -8,758 -3,198 
			 Whipps Cross University Hosp NHS Trust -30,405 -15,606 -14,799 
			 Ashford and St Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust 0 -2,560 2,560 
			 East Kent Hospitals NHS Trust -12,500 -2,606 -9,894 
			 East Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust -3,400 -4,864 1,464 
			 Medway NHS Trust 69 -69 138 
			 Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust -700 -1,293 593 
			 Winchester and Eastleigh Healthcare NHS Trust 0 -305 305 
			 Avon and Wiltshire MHP NHS Trust 0 -2,789 2,789 
			 Gloucestershire Partnership NHS Trust -1,395 -1,319 -76 
			 Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust -7,500 -362 -7,138 
			 Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust 0 -138 138 
			 Swindon and Marlborough NHS Trust 0 -835 835 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 2: Impact on 2006-07 forecast outturn at Strategic Health Authority level of the allocation of the £450 million reserve 
			 Strategic Health Authority SHA economy surplus/(deficit) at quarter three Shares of £450 million pro rata to 2006-07 closing target SHA economy surplus/(deficit) including fair share of  £450 million 
			  £000s £000s £000s 
			 North East 24,090 25,260 49,350 
			 North West 3,384 66,887 70,270 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 406 45,600 46,006 
			 East Midlands -16,699 36,489 19,790 
			 West Midlands 0 48,433 48,433 
			 East of England -174,563 46,022 -128,541 
			 London -125,332 71,434 -53,898 
			 South East Coast -103,432 35,533 -67,899 
			 South Central -14,974 31,272 16,297 
			 South West -29,600 43,071 13,471 
			 England -436,720 450,000 13,280

Northern Ireland: St Andrews Summit

Lord Rooker: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Peter Hain) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	The British and Irish Governments held multi-party talks, with the Northern Ireland political parties, at St Andrews on 10 to 13 October 2006. The aim of the St Andrews summit was to focus discussion on achieving the restoration of the political institutions in Northern Ireland.
	The summit culminated in the St Andrews agreement between the British and Irish Governments. The progress made at St Andrews was significant and has subsequently brought us, with this week's historic statement by the leaders of the DUP and Sinn Fein, to the brink of a stable future for the Government of Northern Ireland. The Government will continue to do everything they can to support the political parties in Northern Ireland in taking the final step towards restoration.
	A total breakdown of the costs for the talks held at the St Andrews summit, which were shared by the British and Irish Governments, has been published on the Northern Ireland Office website today. I have attached a copy of the costs to this Statement and a copy will be placed in the Library of the House.
	
		
			 Cost breakdown for the St Andrews Summit— 11-13 October 2006  
			 Accommodation/Room Hire £121,834.50 
			 The Fairmont St Andrews Hotel (including offices for the delegates and accommodation for the government delegations) £97,614.40 
			 Other St Andrews hotels (delegates' accommodation) £24,220.01 
			 Conference facilities and catering £100,194.57 
			 Hire of conference facilities, catering for officials and delegates £64,722.41 
			 Catering for police £27,966.03 
			 Catering for media £7,506.13 
			 Transport £85,775.86 
			 Charter flights £53,500.24 
			 Scheduled flights £20,101.68 
			 Other transport £4,501.98 
			 Official cars £7,671.96 
			 Technical and Communications: Equipment hire, staging, SAA logo board £55,630.94 
			 Works Charges: Press facilities, plumbing, generators and marquee hire £28,347.79 
			 Total £391,783.66

Pensions: Occupational Schemes

Lord McKenzie of Luton: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (John Hutton) has made the following Statement.
	The Chancellor in his Budget Statement on 21 March announced our decision to significantly extend the help provided by the Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS).
	This announcement was the result of my reflection on the implications of the High Court ruling in the judicial review of the Government's decision to reject the Parliamentary Ombudsman's findings of maladministration by the DWP.
	My reflections have also been informed by the judgment of the ECJ in the Robins case. In that judgment, given on 25 January, the European Court indicated that the level of protection provided to some members of the ASW pension scheme fell short of the level required by Article 8 of the insolvency directive. But the ECJ also said the directive did not require a guarantee of pension rights in full, and it gave a strong steer that damages would not be payable for breach of the directive earlier than the judgment date. Having carefully considered the terms of the ECJ ruling, the Government believe that the enhanced FAS package announced last week offers a level of protection that is compliant with that judgment.
	In its judgment in the judicial review relating to the ombudsman's report, the High Court directed me to reconsider my response to the ombudsman's first recommendation on the basis that maladministration had occurred. I have undertaken my reconsideration on that basis. As a result of that reconsideration we have made this extended FAS package available for all those who suffered losses as a result of their employer's insolvency, and have considered it appropriate to set the assistance at the same level as the protection offered in compliance with the ECJ judgment.
	This announcement is not affected by our appeal against one of the High Court's decisions in the ombudsman case. That appeal has been mounted because the judgement raises important legal and constitutional issues, in particular on the relationship between the ombudsman and the Government, and those issues need to be resolved. This extension to FAS will stand, regardless of the result of our appeal against the finding of maladministration.
	The extended scheme will now provide assistance to ensure that the pensions of all members of affected pension schemes are topped up to 80 per cent of the core pension rights accrued in their scheme.
	We will more than double the cap on assistance payments to £26,000, and in recognition of the significant difference that £10 a week can make to some pensioners, we will end the de minimis rule that excludes those whose FAS payment would be £10 or less a week. Although FAS payments commence at age 65, they will remain "inflation proof" up to age 65.
	In total, an estimated 100,000 will benefit from this extension. Eighty-five thousand scheme members will be eligible for assistance for the first time. Around 15,000 people who stood to benefit from FAS under the current scheme will receive more assistance due to the extension.
	As a result, we expect that all the estimated 125,000 people with losses will be helped. This increases the taxpayer's commitment from £2.3 billion in cumulative cash terms, to £8 billion. This equates to more than doubling the scheme in present value terms, from £830 million to £1.9 billion.
	Having now settled the public expenditure support for these schemes, I have today set up a review to:
	examine how we make best use of the assets in pension schemes that are winding up under-funded with an insolvent employer;determine if these sources of funding could be used to increase assistance for affected scheme members; andconsider any suggestions from interested and concerned parties.
	The review will be conducted by the Department for Work and Pensions and advised by a panel of technical experts. Due to the complexity of the issues involved the review will be informed by advice from the Government Actuary Department. This will commence immediately and the review will report by the end of the year.
	Let me be clear that the 80 per cent level of support we have committed is from the taxpayer, and it is not contingent on the release of any other funding source.
	Regardless of the review, it continues to be important to the interests of all members of affected pension scheme that schemes are wound up as quickly as possible. Should the review identify an alternative way of using scheme assets, we will ensure that no scheme members lose out because their pension scheme has completed the wind-up process.
	It is also important that trustees continue to apply on behalf of members to the Financial Assistance Scheme for payments and provide member data. Failure to do so will mean that people who could be receiving payments will lose out on the substantial help that is now available.

Planning: Commercial Leases

Baroness Andrews: My right honourable friend the Minister for Housing and Planning has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I wish to make a Statement about government policy on commercial leases and the launch of a new property industry code of practice for leasing business premises.
	The starting point is the need for a modern, efficient, competitive industry. The UK commercial property industry is acknowledged as one of the foremost and most sophisticated in the world, exporting its expertise globally.
	However, the Government challenge to the industry is to provide a flexible framework, creating a new partnership between owner and occupier. Our policy is based on careful and thorough research of the property market.
	We have had a positive and collaborative response from all sides of the industry—owners, occupiers, small business organisations and the professional bodies. The industry has developed new ways of working, setting up the Owner and Occupiers' Forum and the Property Industry Alliance. Alongside this, government have been working with business to bring about change.
	The outcome has been agreement on a new code, which I am launching today. This comprises three documents: a landlord's code of practice, an occupier guide and model heads of terms. The landlord's code is significantly stronger in tone and content than the previous code, while the occupier guide and model heads of terms are designed to improve business understanding of lease terms, helping them to get more suitable lease terms.
	It is essential the industry follows this through, and I welcome plans for wide dissemination of the code. My challenge to the industry is to ensure that the code is used in all lease negotiations.
	The British Property Federation is introducing an accreditation scheme identifying landlords who are committed to the new code. This will include an independent complaints procedure. I hope the professional bodies will introduce similar arrangements for their members.
	I recognise the considerable changes in commercial leasing practices over recent years, especially the trends towards shorter leases. But I am concerned about continuing elements of inflexibility, particularly the predominant use of upward-only provisions in rent review clauses and inflexible provisions for tenants exiting property they no longer need.
	We will want to keep a close eye on market practice in these areas. If the market does not deliver, we have identified legislative options. The Department for Communities and Local Government will shortly be consulting the bodies that drew up the code about suitable monitoring arrangements.
	Copies of the code for leasing business premises will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Revenue and Customs: Statutory Charging

Lord Goldsmith: I am today announcing that with effect from 3 April, the Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office (RCPO) will make charging decisions in all indictable-only, either-way or summary offences investigated by HM Revenue and Customs.
	The Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office was established in April 2005. Under Section 37(A)(l)(a) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, as inserted by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and as amended by the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005, the Director of Revenue and Customs Office is empowered to issue guidance on charging. A copy of the guidance has been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	I welcome this development, which recognises the enormous progress made since the independent Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office was established. This move has also been welcomed by HM Revenue and Customs investigators, who have worked closely with RCPO in identifying issues to be covered in the guidance.